SAC as Multiple Monitor Mixer

[IraSeigel]

The idea is that only one master machine has the audio hardware and takes in the signal data... this machine can stay backstage, eliminating the need for running snakes out to the FOH position.

Now with the TCP/IP network hooks, another computer (laptop) can be connected into that main computer and control the system from any other location... and it can be designated as the FOH unit. This unit will be able to reach the FOH mixer and all 24 Monitor mixers.

Another computer can hook in and be designated the Monitor Mixer unit which allows it to reach all 24 monitor mixers only... and up to 24 other units can be hooked in and designated to reach only 1 monitor mixer each... this allows the miscians onstage to control their own complete monitor console.

It should be very exciting.

Bob L


(I've moved this quote to a new thread, because the "SAC Anybody?" thread is getting a little long.)

The setup that Bob describes here sounds similar to the ethernet-based systems that are out there (Aviom, for example: http://www.aviom.com) that allow each musician to have their own mixer and custom mix on stage. I've seen one such system in use, and it's very cool, altho kind of complicated to set up.

Is the SAC setup described above similar in purpose to the Aviom? That would be extremely hip. I'd explore giving each band member a Behringer BCF or (for a high-budget tour) a tablet Gateway or Thinkpad.

And a Q for Bob: how would you allow licensing multiple uses of SAC simultaneously? Would a user need to buy a "4-pack", for instance, in order to do 4 monitor mixes on stage? What's your thinking on that?

Thanks,
Ira

[Bob L]

Ira... the idea is exactly that... each musician can use his own laptop, or whatever to control his monitor console... completely... no splitter cables and mic lines to run all across the stage to feed these mix stations... a simple ethernet hub or wireless (if you trust that) and they can hook in.

A separate monitor mixer can override all monitor mixes, in case floor wedges are getting out of control from the musician mixes... obviously, in-ears would be the choice here... and the FOH position can override every other mix.

The license comes with the FOH, Monitor and all 24 Musician positions included... quite a deal. :)

Bob L

[IraSeigel]

A separate monitor mixer can override all monitor mixes, in case floor wedges are getting out of control from the musician mixes... obviously, in-ears would be the choice here... and the FOH position can override every other mix.

Bob L

Ah, the "more me" effect. Will there be a button on the console? Make it go to 11.:)

Some of these younger musicians can barely play their own instruments. Not sure I want to trust them mixing their own monitors!

But seriously, SAC will open up many new possibilities. I hadn't even thought of the monitoring possibilites until you mentioned networking. I'm just excited to be able to finally tour with a console and effects in my carry-on luggage!!!

And the licensing arrangement is great. Thanks!

Ira

[Bob L]

You will not be able to use midi controllers for the muscian mixes... way too complex... a laptop or tablet will work great for that though... muscians will not have any real need for hands on 24 faders.

Besides, each of the monitor consoles will be able to maintain its own automation cue list, so the muscians can simply toggle to the next cue to alter the mixes within songs... I can't wait to check it all out myself. :)

Bob L

[IraSeigel]

Besides, each of the monitor consoles will be able to maintain its own automation cue list, so the muscians can simply toggle to the next cue to alter the mixes within songs... I can't wait to check it all out myself. :)

Bob L

Sounds like a companion book, "SAC for Musicians and other Dummies" will be in order.:)

Ira

[AudioAstronomer]

Wow, that's awesome!

[Scott Anthony]

a laptop or tablet will work great for that though...

Or maybe down the road a Pocket PC? I've got a box full of them...

[bcorkery]

Or maybe iPhone? :D

[Pedro Itriago]

Or maybe down the road a Pocket PC? I've got a box full of them...

You can control a pc from a pocket pc using network services, sorta like remote connection

[Scott Anthony]

You can control a pc from a pocket pc using network services, sorta like remote connection

Do you mean terminal services? For this use, thanks, but no thanks...

:)

[ttako]

I think a great choice for controlling the mixes with here are the new very cheapo asus EEE notebooks...
for around 200-300 USD, they could be the solution!


Tamas

[IraSeigel]

I think a great choice for controlling the mixes with here are the new very cheapo asus EEE notebooks...
for around 200-300 USD, they could be the solution!
Tamas

Yes, something like that would make a great choice. ASUS has a few new models (U2E, I think) that would also be good.

Ira

[Bud Johnson]

I think a great choice for controlling the mixes with here are the new very cheapo asus EEE notebooks...
for around 200-300 USD, they could be the solution!

Tamas

They run a linux that's "win XP compatible". For SAC purposes, would that work?

Also, Bob mentioned hooks to SS to record directly into the MT. Would this apply to other daw sw as well? Maybe using virt audio cables or some such?

Just wondering about potential market share. It's potential sales could further expose people to SS.

Bud Johnson

[IraSeigel]

They run a linux that's "win XP compatible". For SAC purposes, would that work?

Also, Bob mentioned hooks to SS to record directly into the MT. Would this apply to other daw sw as well? Maybe using virt audio cables or some such?

Just wondering about potential market share. It's potential sales could further expose people to SS.

Bud Johnson

With Linux, probably not. I know I wouldn't trust a live gig to it!

Interesting application, that Virtual Audio Cables. Also check out Stream Boy from http://www.elevayta.com/
Ira

[Bob L]

The hooks have to come into and out of the individual track buses at various tap-off points... a generic hook will not work... this will be specific to SS.

Bob L

[brent]

(I've moved this quote to a new thread, because the "SAC Anybody?" thread is getting a little long.)

The setup that Bob describes here sounds similar to the ethernet-based systems that are out there (Aviom, for example: http://www.aviom.com) that allow each musician to have their own mixer and custom mix on stage. I've seen one such system in use, and it's very cool, altho kind of complicated to set up.

Is the SAC setup described above similar in purpose to the Aviom? That would be extremely hip. I'd explore giving each band member a Behringer BCF or (for a high-budget tour) a tablet Gateway or Thinkpad.

And a Q for Bob: how would you allow licensing multiple uses of SAC simultaneously? Would a user need to buy a "4-pack", for instance, in order to do 4 monitor mixes on stage? What's your thinking on that?

Thanks,
Ira

High budget tours are not doing personal mixes on stage. They will not allow Behringer gear either. They are using digital and analog consoles (because they can) and wireless IEMs. I don't think that you are going to see any major tours base their monitor systems on multiple computers, which:
1. WILL crash at some point.
2. Take up space, get in the way and get broken. etc
3. Will not have the balls to drive a headphone on stage.
4. Force you to relocate the RF transmitters away from their network, distributed antenna system, and racks. With the whitespace going away, the 700 band gone now, it is essential to have your transmitters networked and constantly monitored. Can't do this if it is all over the stage.

Aviom is crap. It sounds like crap. It is not robust. It IS a great idea. Every tour that I have been on that has tried it ditched it. It IS a great fixed install system.

For the record, the Furman analog solution with it's thick/heavy cable, and disposable plastic connectors is a pile of garbage. I had a large 16 station system installed in a pro church environment. The pots are crap too. Forgot that.

The thing to do with SAC is let it be what it is and don't try to make it all things. That doesn't work with any product. You will still need the infrastructure that pro monitoring demands.

[Bud Johnson]

With Linux, probably not. I know I wouldn't trust a live gig to it!

Interesting application, that Virtual Audio Cables. Also check out Stream Boy from http://www.elevayta.com/
Ira
If I believe their PR, that would work, at least on the main outs as a mix, but maybe also on a track basis if inserted pre fader. (if that can be done-need to see it),
If
it doesn't cache-preload-or what ever- buffers
And
CPU overhead doesn't kill the system. Not to mention the alternate daw overhead killing it.
Anyway, I use SS. Just thought it could be a neat way to expose nuendo-sonar-samplitude-etc. users that haven't been, to SS.

Bud Johnson

[Bud Johnson]

High budget tours are not doing personal mixes on stage. They will not allow Behringer gear either. They are using digital and analog consoles (because they can) and wireless IEMs. I don't think that you are going to see any major tours base their monitor systems on multiple computers, which:
1. WILL crash at some point.
2. Take up space, get in the way and get broken. etc
3. Will not have the balls to drive a headphone on stage.
4. Force you to relocate the RF transmitters away from their network, distributed antenna system, and racks. With the whitespace going away, the 700 band gone now, it is essential to have your transmitters networked and constantly monitored. Can't do this if it is all over the stage.

Aviom is crap. It sounds like crap. It is not robust. It IS a great idea. Every tour that I have been on that has tried it ditched it. It IS a great fixed install system.

For the record, the Furman analog solution with it's thick/heavy cable, and disposable plastic connectors is a pile of garbage. I had a large 16 station system installed in a pro church environment. The pots are crap too. Forgot that.

The thing to do with SAC is let it be what it is and don't try to make it all things. That doesn't work with any product. You will still need the infrastructure that pro monitoring demands.

Can't speak to Aviom, no experience. Can't really speak to high budget tours either. I'm a studio guy that occasionally does small live sound...if they beg.
But, I know a thing or two about business, technology, and human behavior.
"Avid is the only surviving platform"
"Wintel is dead in Hollywood"
"Mac is King"
are among the quotes I've seen touted as the way things are and always shall be.
Computers die, so do channel strips and entire boards, digital and analogue, as does everything else on stage.
An IEM controlled by a puter the size of a paperback doesn't take up more space than a water bottle.
The monitor level is controlled by the mixer-sound card and amplifier. Same as before.
RF transmitters would remain where they were. The thing controlling them wiil have moved.
Unless I'm missing something.
My whole family is home with the flu today, so I guess I just feel like stirring things up.
Bud Johnson

[lofi studios]

i vote that too!!!

i fail to see why using a computer would be any more risky than a desk. i spent 20 mins last night waiting for the 'sound engineers' to work out what was wrong with their desk ...

as i see it you feed some pres into the puter then

1, record them
2, foh them
3, monitor mix them.

all working on the same set of pres but feeding separate programs and amps. the artists can have finite, real time access to the mix they want.

the crowd can get a decent mix with decent compression and eq.

you record a flat signal thats not been tampered with.

this is easily available in SSL, i do it all the time in the studio, its just that the games going to go up a step.

Iain

[Bob L]

You do realize that all digital consoles are actually computers already... so the current industry is already dependent on computers for all high budget tours... realize that if and when that desk goes down... its not so easy to fix on the spot... but in the case of SAC... another laptop from the tour bus might just get the show up and running. :)

Bob L

[Bud Johnson]

You do realize that all digital consoles are actually computers already... so the current industry is already dependent on computers for all high budget tours... realize that if and when that desk goes down... its not so easy to fix on the spot... but in the case of SAC... another laptop from the tour bus might just get the show up and running. :)

Bob L

My point.
Bud Johnson

[bassthumper]

You do realize that all digital consoles are actually computers already... so the current industry is already dependent on computers for all high budget tours... realize that if and when that desk goes down... its not so easy to fix on the spot... but in the case of SAC... another laptop from the tour bus might just get the show up and running. :)

Bob L


From My perspective in a church environment, Sac would be ideal. In order to get the same quality produced by SAW Studio it would take much more money than I can justify to spend in the sound (I would have the pastor and the church board after my head), and compromising on quality is something I cannot justify. I am sure that same quality will be evident in SAC.

We already are using SAW so the hardware for the most part is in place its just a matter of a few tweaks and adjustments. I would certainly love to give Yamaha the boot off my monitor stand on the platform. I run 3 mixes simply because myself and the FOH guy don't trust the dummer............. oooops I mean drummer and guitar players to leave well enough alone. Myself as bassist and 1 electric guitar player are the only ones using IEM or headphones all others are wedges. By adding minimal hardware to our already existing setup I could easily take on the 3 remaining monitor mixes available for the band leaving the FOH guys with that and the pulpit mix only.

I can't see going out and buying Aviom or Hearback or some other bell or whistle that comes along when I can simply load software and viola, i got it on my laptop that takes of less space than does my bass on its stand. Space in my venue is critical. I don't have anymore to take and I ain't giving none away.

[brent]

Can't speak to Aviom, no experience. Can't really speak to high budget tours either. I'm a studio guy that occasionally does small live sound...if they beg.
But, I know a thing or two about business, technology, and human behavior.
"Avid is the only surviving platform"
"Wintel is dead in Hollywood"
"Mac is King"
are among the quotes I've seen touted as the way things are and always shall be.
Computers die, so do channel strips and entire boards, digital and analogue, as does everything else on stage.
An IEM controlled by a puter the size of a paperback doesn't take up more space than a water bottle.
The monitor level is controlled by the mixer-sound card and amplifier. Same as before.
RF transmitters would remain where they were. The thing controlling them wiil have moved.
Unless I'm missing something.
My whole family is home with the flu today, so I guess I just feel like stirring things up.
Bud Johnson


Aviom and all other digital signal hubs require you to have a splitter, just like the analog systems. Aviom and most of the other systems have a limited channel count. In large systems that I have done or worked on, there is still a need for the digital console, to provide groups to the Aviom. There is not one system out there that is designed with EQ, dynamics, etc to replace the monitor console.

There are some small tours that I have worked with that have eliminated the monitor console with a large FOH console that is actually split and operated as FOH and MON, because they had a small channel count. That has been practiced for a while in analog world too.

What I read here is this: Cat5/6 cable daisy chaining multiple laptops on a stage. Ok. What if the first computer in the chain crashes? What if there is a snag in Ethernet land? What if someone rolls a case over the cables?

If a major tour is going out with IEMs, they are usually networked for frequency management. This must be done from one location, monitor world, where the console is, where the active antenna receiver or transmitter is. The active antenna system has cable length limits. Since the antenna are very directional, +/-50 degrees, you have to locate the receivers within cable length, of those positions, which are dictated by the stage/performer layout. You don't just set them anywhere you want.

Yes, digital consoles have computers, but they are using embedded software that is on a chip, not booting from a drive. That said, they are much more stable. They have software and hardware that is designed to work together. Yamaha makes it's own chips. Digidesign has it's chips made for them. They are NOT using off the shelf stuff throughout. When it comes to tech support, it is much easier to call a Yama or Digi guy and get something solved than to get on a board and try to chase down all of the things that could be wrong with a PC's drivers, hardware, etc, only to find out it is not the audio software's issues.

My point is that SAC should replace the console, and not the whole Aviom system as well. You are going to still need a splitter. The antenna system must remain where it can cover the stage, and the associated hardware with 25'. By the time that cable runs down a 6' stand, that doesn't leave much travel.

[brent]

From My perspective in a church environment, Sac would be ideal. In order to get the same quality produced by SAW Studio it would take much more money than I can justify to spend in the sound (I would have the pastor and the church board after my head), and compromising on quality is something I cannot justify. I am sure that same quality will be evident in SAC.

We already are using SAW so the hardware for the most part is in place its just a matter of a few tweaks and adjustments. I would certainly love to give Yamaha the boot off my monitor stand on the platform. I run 3 mixes simply because myself and the FOH guy don't trust the dummer............. oooops I mean drummer and guitar players to leave well enough alone. Myself as bassist and 1 electric guitar player are the only ones using IEM or headphones all others are wedges. By adding minimal hardware to our already existing setup I could easily take on the 3 remaining monitor mixes available for the band leaving the FOH guys with that and the pulpit mix only.

I can't see going out and buying Aviom or Hearback or some other bell or whistle that comes along when I can simply load software and viola, i got it on my laptop that takes of less space than does my bass on its stand. Space in my venue is critical. I don't have anymore to take and I ain't giving none away.

This has been my position. Put it in a church, train the people, train the people and...train the people.

Well, you are not making a fair comparison. Aviom is a digital spitter/hub. It allows you to do more than that, and should never be purchased for one player. SAC is software. Both need a feed from somewhere.

[Bob L]

No Brent... no need for a splitter... and you will use a hub for multiple remote laptop access.. so each computer is not dependent on the other... of course the hub must keep working.

SAC will split the signal digitally internally... up to 25 splits... perfect copies of the input signals... very hard, if not impossible to do with a hardware splitter... and that would cost a fortune if you caould do it.

The monitor consoles can take the split from the inpit channel at the top of the strip (direct from the source), or pst att, or pst eq, or pst dyn - pre fader, or pst fader, allowing for an incredible amount of signal flexibility... each channel of each monitor console has these selections, so you can decide to have some channels on a particular monitor mix follow the house or not... this opens a whole new dimension of audio mixing, in my opinion, and one that will be pretty difficult for any hardware system to match.

It will prove to be interesting, at the very least, to see where this all ends up... and even though there might be initial resistance... in the end... I believe that resistance will melt away as more and more brave souls jump in and start enjoying the benefits.

Bob L

[brent]

Guys, I plan to use this stuff in the church sector to the max. Some things sound simple in concept but are harder to apply in larger systems. While it sounds good to have all of your eggs in one basket, it can sometimes limit revenues in many ways for touring companies.

One of the best sounding digitally controlled analog systems (Gamble) is not the standard and never will be. We have to face reality. People like hardware.

[brent]

No Brent... no need for a splitter... and you will use a hub for multiple remote laptop access.. so each computer is not dependent on the other... of course the hub must keep working.

SAC will split the signal digitally internally... up to 25 splits... perfect copies of the input signals... very hard, if not impossible to do with a hardware splitter... and that would cost a fortune if you caould do it.

The monitor consoles can take the split from the inpit channel at the top of the strip (direct from the source), or pst att, or pst eq, or pst dyn - pre fader, or pst fader, allowing for an incredible amount of signal flexibility... each channel of each monitor console has these selections, so you can decide to have some channels on a particular monitor mix follow the house or not... this opens a whole new dimension of audio mixing, in my opinion, and one that will be pretty difficult for any hardware system to match.

It will prove to be interesting, at the very least, to see where this all ends up... and even though there might be initial resistance... in the end... I believe that resistance will melt away as more and more brave souls jump in and start enjoying the benefits.

Bob L

I fail to see why you would not need a splitter. Check this out. One Crest V12 at FOH, with ALL DOs feeding a multitrack, ALL auxes used for DSP, ALL Matrixs used for distributed feeds (CCTV, web, cry room, offices, etc). I still need a splitter and convertors. Lets consider a digital console in the same facility. It's maxed out as well, BUT there are Yamaha card slots for AES/EBU outs (though not for every channel). I still need a splitter.

I am not going to be able to convince churches who just spent a crap load in a capital campaign to ditch it all to run SAC at FOH to use it for monitors. I WILL however be able to do this with new construction, which I started pimping last year, hoping that it would happen soon.

[IraSeigel]

Guys, I plan to use this stuff in the church sector to the max. Some things sound simple in concept but are harder to apply in larger systems. While it sounds good to have all of your eggs in one basket, it can sometimes limit revenues in many ways for touring companies.

One of the best sounding digitally controlled analog systems (Gamble) is not the standard and never will be. We have to face reality. People like hardware.

But Brent, it sounds like you'll agree that, just as there isn't a "standard", there is room in the market, because of personal preferences, technical abilities, show-specific requirements, shipping and freight limitations/costs, etc., that there is a whole new dimension in mixing experiences that are being opened up with the introduction of a product like SAC.

I only mentioned Aviom in an earlier post not to say it's a standard or has become a paradigm to emulate/surpass. Just as the PM1D or Digi Venue (or Gamble) aren't the be all and end all of live mixing consoles. I mentioned Aviom just so that I could get my head around the concepts that Bob and Hap were talking about.

We're too diverse and independent a group - how many of us do the suit and tie and rush hour commute every day - to meekly accept what marketing people tell us to believe and buy. That's why there are so many different consoles, speakers, and other components. (Let's just pray that Digidesign doesn't eventually offer Bob "an offer he can't refuse"!!)

I think the product will provide an important alternative to the current "paradigm", which is the hardware mixing console. I think that via discussions like these, we'll be able to expand our own thought horizons, which is a good thing. This really IS cutting-edge stuff, and if Bob executes successfully, it WILL be as important as the 1D, V/DOSC, Crown IC, etc.

I just hope that Bob is now living in an underground concrete bunker somewhere in Vegas that is impervious to fire and other disasters!

Ira

[brent]

But Brent, it sounds like you'll agree that, just as there isn't a "standard", there is room in the market, because of personal preferences, technical abilities, show-specific requirements, shipping and freight limitations/costs, etc., that there is a whole new dimension in mixing experiences that are being opened up with the introduction of a product like SAC.

I only mentioned Aviom in an earlier post not to say it's a standard or has become a paradigm to emulate/surpass. Just as the PM1D or Digi Venue (or Gamble) aren't the be all and end all of live mixing consoles. I mentioned Aviom just so that I could get my head around the concepts that Bob and Hap were talking about.

We're too diverse and independent a group - how many of us do the suit and tie and rush hour commute every day - to meekly accept what marketing people tell us to believe and buy. That's why there are so many different consoles, speakers, and other components. (Let's just pray that Digidesign doesn't eventually offer Bob "an offer he can't refuse"!!)

I think the product will provide an important alternative to the current "paradigm", which is the hardware mixing console. I think that via discussions like these, we'll be able to expand our own thought horizons, which is a good thing. This really IS cutting-edge stuff, and if Bob executes successfully, it WILL be as important as the 1D, V/DOSC, Crown IC, etc.

I just hope that Bob is now living in an underground concrete bunker somewhere in Vegas that is impervious to fire and other disasters!

Ira

I am not disputing that Bob is doing something kick butt here. I have been emailing him for about two years or so begging for info. I WILL spec it and sell it for him.

My point again is to not be overly simplistic in thought, assuming things work the same for all tiers of production. They don't. That's it. One tool will not be all things for all people. That's nothing new. Something like this may get the majority of the industry more united than ever. It will have to be implemented in different forms and fashion than designed I suspect, because companies will need to continue making payments on that gear in the wharehouse.

Hardware consoles are still being made and likely always will be. The paradigm shift in the high end is actually moving towards one console for ALL audio/lighting/video needs. So, for that end, forget it.

In recording, we will likely never be hardware free either. Movies must be mixed with hardware shared by multiple engineers. There is a market for consoles again and Neve, the real Neve, API, SSL are responding. Mackie still sells a crap load of 32x8s and 24x8s. The larger studios doing PT have Digi controllers.

The low to mid level guys might be hardware free. But to say that everyone will be is absurd I think.

[bassthumper]

This has been my position. Put it in a church, train the people, train the people and...train the people.

Well, you are not making a fair comparison. Aviom is a digital spitter/hub. It allows you to do more than that, and should never be purchased for one player. SAC is software. Both need a feed from somewhere.


Brent you totally missed my point. My feed already exists because SAW is in place. No need for a separate feed.

On one of your previous posts you stated many "ifs". My family always told when I would "if" something to death; If "if" was a skiff we would all take a ride. I would have those same ifs when dealing with Aviom, Hearback, or any other digital module. Point is regardless of whether its digital or analog equipment goes down and you must be prepared for this when it happens.

[Bob L]

The Gamble system is based on my original SAC concept from 1992... in fact, Hristo worked for me for many years and split off to do his own thing.

I believe the software design plays a factor in the limits of the Gamble console... and of course, the fact that it is still hardware based influences the cost factor... although most of us are fans of the Gamble hardware designs... I feel SAC offers a whole new approach that will be near impossible to match in hardware based systems.

Bob L

[Warren]

I pray that all the statements like "It cant, never will, won't work, can never replace, allways has to be" are limited to those whom are not striving to make a better product for us to make better music and performances.

I look forward to the future of this products potential in this industry and predict that Bob will be a force to contend with as other companies try to compete.

Since I started live sound 20 + years ago I dreamed of a fully software console, now I would like to see it with a touch screen that would display at least 24x8x2 of the mixer without scrolling.

Thanks Bob

[brent]

Brent you totally missed my point. My feed already exists because SAW is in place. No need for a separate feed.

On one of your previous posts you stated many "ifs". My family always told when I would "if" something to death; If "if" was a skiff we would all take a ride. I would have those same ifs when dealing with Aviom, Hearback, or any other digital module. Point is regardless of whether its digital or analog equipment goes down and you must be prepared for this when it happens.

This business is all about safety nets and thinking fast on your feet. I understand. I am 40, been in this for 20+, have toured with Grammy artists and the major names in broadcast Christian television.

With analog, I have NEVER had an analog console or ANY analog gear fail me during a show. EVER. I have worked for a couple of large rental houses and contractors. Same thing. I have used nearly every digital console out there. Same thing. Now multiply me times the number of companies and engineers out there. We don't NEED to take two of everything out with us because of that. We can solve a problem with a patch cable. If one module goes, you replace it with a spare on the spot, or have enough channels left to quick patch. Sure, accidents can happen. But if you maintain your gear, things should be good almost all of the time. Analog dies slow and gracefully. Digital just freaks and quits and there is no amount of premaintenance or testing in the shop that can let you know that something could go wrong.

When this takes off, it will only be as stable as a network can be. Anyone here work in an office with networks? Anyone ever hear, "The network is down?" Why do they have full time IT guys? It will only work if the computer works. The computer is not under Bob's sole control. I think Bob needs to get yoked with someone who can offer a stripped MS OS and certification for hardware. This will add some peace of mind power to the purchase. For pros, this will not be an easy sell, just as working with any digital console is not an easy sell, when some people consider analog a step from digital in sound and reliability.

[IraSeigel]

The computer is not under Bob's sole control. I think Bob needs to get yoked with someone who can offer a stripped MS OS and certification for hardware. This will add some peace of mind power to the purchase.

This idea has some merit. (Not to say your others don't, Brent!)
Ira

[Warren]

There is not much to striping down an OS to be more stable and XP is the most stable to date. And as far as a network all you really need is a crossover cable between computers if more than two cpu's, bring a spare switch, In sound reinforcement spare has been the way ya stay alive so what the problem bring a spare switch? Its not like its another amp rack full of Crest 8001's . Its not a perfect world in analog or digital there will always be failures. the beta version of this product has not even come out and already you give it grave reviews based on problems you had with other junk you bought, back off, let it come out and get some air I am sure Bob will get all if any bugs worked out. If you did not trust his coding, you would not be using his software and hense not be on this forum.

GIVE IT A CHANCE

Awaiting a Flame

[lofi studios]

how much are these desks in cost compaired to a laptop? couldnt you just have a spair running? i can understand the worries but think they might be over stated this time.

OT, its wiered to hear you guys mention church so much, its unheard of in the UK.

Iain

[ffarrell]

Well let me tell my story.

I own 3 Digidesign Venue desk ( BTW digi's DSP cards live on a ATX motherboard) and in the last 200 + shows we have not had any problems.

The digico D5 runs on a windows platform. ( it did have some crashes but I think the 3.0 software fixed it. )

Before I had the Venue desk we used the Midas H3000 and it's automation locked up one night so I had no faders for the whole show. I disabled the automation and no more problems.

In my early years with Clair Bros I've had consoles go out, Mostly Power supplies. I onces use a car battery to give me 12V for the Clair desk. The show most go on.


The 4000G SSL I ran for Steve Miller would crash, we had the factory repair guy over 3 times in the year and a half I worked for Steve.

I was the second one to buy SAC , Why?

In the last 8 years or more, 100 shows a year, in all conditions, Canada in the winter time - outside shows in Las Vegas in the Summer time, we have used SAW to play back Audio and Video tracks all over the world and we have not had a crash ...........ever.

If Bob released it, I will count on it.

[Warren]

how much are these desks in cost compaired to a laptop? couldnt you just have a spair running? i can understand the worries but think they might be over stated this time.

OT, its wiered to hear you guys mention church so much, its unheard of in the UK.

Iain

Here in the U.S.A. a lot of our medium to large churches have worship during services to praise the Lord, they comsist of sound systems that can accomidate up to 15000 to 20000 or more people per service and often two to four services a day. There are also of course smaller churches too.

But you made my point a laptop an a network switch as spares already setup is nothing to complain about, I don't see an issue,

Thanks

[Bob L]

SAW ran the Hilton's Starlight Express show for almost 2 years... I think 2 shows a night 5 or 6 nites a week... no crashes... it can be done..

I toured for years with Paul Anka... just about everytime we pulled the console and gear out of the truck we had to take something apart and reseat some circuit boards....

We depend on gear... it can and will fail... SAC and its computer will not be impervious to that... but I have already established SAW's capacity to run large show formats for years and years in Vegas and on tour all over the world... with no issues... period.

So that conversation is simply not realistic... the stability factor has already been established.

And Brent... I still say... no need for a snake splitter... you patch staright into SAC and you get 24 stereo monitor desks which can pull signal from one of the 6 split points I mentioned... so... to send a TV truck mix... fine... an entire stereo console already patched from the FOH inputs is at your disposal... etc.

Bob L

[Bud Johnson]

I was the second one to buy SAC , Why?

In the last 8 years or more, 100 shows a year, in all conditions, Canada in the winter time - outside shows in Las Vegas in the Summer time, we have used SAW to play back Audio and Video tracks all over the world and we have not had a crash ...........ever.

If Bob released it, I will count on it.

What he said! At least once Dave "it's a dry heat" Labrecque finds some bug using it to control RC helicopters while doing remote VO sessions.:p
(That's a compliment Dave)
Bud Johnson

[Warren]

It's not the software that I would be worried about Frank, whether it be SAW or any other time tested software.

Mark

My fear has been that Internet Explorer will continue to work for you Mark!:eek: Just kidding

[brent]

SAW ran the Hilton's Starlight Express show for almost 2 years... I think 2 shows a night 5 or 6 nites a week... no crashes... it can be done..

I toured for years with Paul Anka... just about everytime we pulled the console and gear out of the truck we had to take something apart and reseat some circuit boards....

We depend on gear... it can and will fail... SAC and its computer will not be impervious to that... but I have already established SAW's capacity to run large show formats for years and years in Vegas and on tour all over the world... with no issues... period.

So that conversation is simply not realistic... the stability factor has already been established.

And Brent... I still say... no need for a snake splitter... you patch staright into SAC and you get 24 stereo monitor desks which can pull signal from one of the 6 split points I mentioned... so... to send a TV truck mix... fine... an entire stereo console already patched from the FOH inputs is at your disposal... etc.

Bob L

Ok. What is the limit to each cable length, or is it cumulative?

[Warren]

I just tried two remotes one XP and one 98 the host was running 32 tracks I repeated the song at least 10 times no errors and 98 was sooooth as the XP remote was and only has 128 meg ram, meter updates were instant
I think this is going to be great.

[Leadfoot]

it's amazing how many nay sayers you run into when trying to do something possibly revolutionary. sure there's a lot of things to consider when doing live sound.. as much as we all love it, it is quite a pain in the ass, setting up and tearing down all that gear at light speed in usually bad conditions.. then just looking around at the rig and all that money tied up in racks and stacks and trucks and cabling, pm5d's(1d's) blah blah, whatever the big whiney clients have to have.. if even half of what bob says is possible, i say bring it on. i think it's exciting. computers scare me too, but i'm sure if it all works, it'll be worth whatever it takes to keep the systems working solidly. everyones gone digital mainly for the convenience factor, routing, built in fx/inserts, recall.. those consoles are huge bucks. the damn 5d in the case weighs like 5 or 6 hundred pounds, (case/desk/doghouse/snake head..).
for what sac has the potential to do, i think it's worth it to pursue the possibilities. heck bob was way ahead of everyone with saw, and look what it became.
i can see it now, mr bigtime band engineer comes in to mix and sees a computer screen.. and i say, this is the real future pal!

tony

[brent]

Ok. I am doing a church install. I am in for the pre-release I think.

Do you have to buy licenses for each station?

Is there a cut sheet link listing all features/functions?

What laptops should I be looking at?

[ffarrell]

It's not the software that I would be worried about Frank, whether it be SAW. SAC or any other time tested software.

With all due respect, you are not using a laptop or desktop running on a CPU to mix your show, but very robust DSP based digital console with redundant systems. Although important to your show, SAW is simply playing back audio and video files on cue, as important and reliable as that been for you.


So the analog audio path was still working just fine, but you had a computer freeze up or crash.:)
Mark

Well
kinda, the routing within the H3000 went south ( DCA's more or less ) but yes it was under Midas computer control

but you are right on all counts.

My point is as tech moves follow , like it or not most system will be on top of a kernel of XP or Lunix so we are mixing with PC just covered up.

If a system is setup and left to do ONLY what it was put in service to do it should run as well as any hardware system.

The debate will be if one can adapt to the new ergonomics of a laptop only.

It is a great time to be alive
fvf

[Warren]

I don't think Bob has established all the requirment yet but I bet the remotes wont take much, and If I am not mistaken the license will be for up to 2 monitor remotes and FOH per setup,
Please correct me if I am wrong Bob.

I mentioned in another post about using an old 98 laptop while connected to SAWStudio it was a pent two with 128 meg and if I remember right Bob stated
not to use anything below NT while using SAW. I had no issues connecting 2 remotes using poor quality machines and high track counts.

I am sure that Bobs recomendation will be very conservetive, someone here mentioned about using a PDA pocket PC I sure hope that this can happen as it would decrease total costs 10 fold.

[IraSeigel]

SAW ran the Hilton's Starlight Express show for almost 2 years... I think 2 shows a night 5 or 6 nites a week... no crashes... it can be done..

I toured for years with Paul Anka... just about everytime we pulled the console and gear out of the truck we had to take something apart and reseat some circuit boards....
Bob L

SAW32 (I believe) is still running the show at the Excalibur, as well.

And as for Paul Anka, it must have been Al Siniscal's gear (A1 Audio) that you had to fix regularly. That's no slam on Al. I used his gear for Manilow tours in the late 70's to '83. A custom-modified (to my specs) PM1000 for monitors!! State of the art. For 1979.

Ira

[Dave Labrecque]

I fail to see why you would not need a splitter. Check this out. One Crest V12 at FOH, with ALL DOs feeding a multitrack, ALL auxes used for DSP, ALL Matrixs used for distributed feeds (CCTV, web, cry room, offices, etc). I still need a splitter and convertors. Lets consider a digital console in the same facility. It's maxed out as well, BUT there are Yamaha card slots for AES/EBU outs (though not for every channel). I still need a splitter.

I am not going to be able to convince churches who just spent a crap load in a capital campaign to ditch it all to run SAC at FOH to use it for monitors. I WILL however be able to do this with new construction, which I started pimping last year, hoping that it would happen soon.

Brent, I think he means no splitter because there's no hardware console with which to share the signals. All inputs come into SAC. SAC sends them everywhere they need to go.

[Warren]

And just what exactly is a "crap load" anyway? :eek: Sounds a bit messy, I dont think I would of made that kinda purchase anyway.:D

[DominicPerry]

Ok. What is the limit to each cable length, or is it cumulative?

A single run of standard Ethernet (100baseT) which is Ethernet over copper cable is 100metres. There are lots of options to extend this if it isn't enough.

Dominic

[sstillwell]

Yup. Switches or reapeaters can easily double or triple that distance. If you go to fiber optic you're up to anywhere from 220 meters to 70 kilometers depending on cable and optical emitter type...I think you're gonna have trouble hearing your mix from that far away. :)

Scott

[Dave Labrecque]

Viola?

[DominicPerry]

Viola?

I'm more a 'cello man myself.

Dominic

[Dave Labrecque]

I'm more a 'cello man myself.

Dominic

Short for... ?

Perhaps your a Thomas Jefferson officianado? Maybe you can give me the "nickel" tour?

Gawd, I kill me.

[ttako]

They run a linux that's "win XP compatible". For SAC purposes, would that work?

Also, Bob mentioned hooks to SS to record directly into the MT. Would this apply to other daw sw as well? Maybe using virt audio cables or some such?

Just wondering about potential market share. It's potential sales could further expose people to SS.

Bud Johnson

Just FYI Win XP install is possible to the EEE line of Asus Notebooks! Win xp boots in 30sec! Not bad...
And cheap as well...

Asus told, the next version may will have touchscreen at the same price.

I have to ask somethink here:
Is there any possibility/method to build a fully redundant core system using SAC?

Thanks,

Tamas

[Mountain Media]

Short for... ?

Perhaps your a Thomas Jefferson officianado? Maybe you can give me the "nickel" tour?

Gawd, I kill me.

The 'nickel' tour is of The Holy Grail - Monti(y) Python, not Monti-cello!! ;)

I live about 20 minutes from Jefferson's summer home, Poplar Forest, which was built by him as a 'mini' Monticello.

[Bob L]

If by totally redundant system using SAC, you mean is there a way to have a running backup... I would guess so...

Input splitting can be easily done with a light-pipe splitter into two separate SAC systems... output switching becomes a little more difficult and would require some creative concepts to be applied...

Bob L

[brent]

A single run of standard Ethernet (100baseT) which is Ethernet over copper cable is 100metres. There are lots of options to extend this if it isn't enough.

Dominic

Sorry. I know what the specs are. I didn't know if SAW was limiting that in some way.

[DominicPerry]

Sorry. I know what the specs are. I didn't know if SAW was limiting that in some way.

You mean even my dull IT knowledge is no use to anyone?;) :D

Dominic

[Bud Johnson]

Just FYI Win XP install is possible to the EEE line of Asus Notebooks! Win xp boots in 30sec! Not bad...
And cheap as well...

Asus told, the next version may will have touchscreen at the same price.
Thanks,
Tamas
That could be scary fun!
Where are you finding this info please?
All I could find was boiler plate for the general public.
Bud Johnson

[Cary B. Cornett]

With analog, I have NEVER had an analog console or ANY analog gear fail me during a show. EVER. I was helping out with, and recording, a small venue concert where they were using a recently acquired analog board. The board was flaky as hell! Various channels had that "intermittent bad connection" sound.

This was shortly after my son and I had finished handling sound for the run of a stage musical in the same theater. We ran the whole thing using SawStudio to run the live mix while recording the shows. Not one tiny hiccup in any performance. No flaky switches and pots to worry about (except on the converters which were pretty much new).

The next show we were running was to be more complex, so at first we were considering using the "house console"... but after that concert night, we didn't even consider it.

I find I worry less about a SAW-based system than I did about the analog setups I used to use. I am betting that, after SAC goes through the early shakedown phase, it will amaze -- and convince -- a lot of people who SWORE they would never use a computer to handle a mix. I was pretty skeptical myself before I tried it out. Not too long before, I would have SWORN you would never get me to trust a live show to a computer setup.

Can it fail? Of course it can. No system is absolutely fail-proof (just ask NASA). I have had analog stuff fail. I am, among other things, a tech. I have done console repairs, so I know what's involved. Having a "spare" computer for a SAC setup would be cheap insurance, and all the parts can usually be found locally on short notice. Given the choice between repairing a console or building and installing a replacement computer between performances, I prefer the computer. As for the other gear... well, I see little difference in "failure risk" between the rack equipment for an analog setup and the converters and such for the digital setup.

The only thing that keeps me from buying into SAC right now is the current extreme tightness of my budget.

[Warren]

I was helping out with, and recording, a small venue concert where they were using a recently acquired analog board. The board was flaky as hell! Various channels had that "intermittent bad connection" sound.

This was shortly after my son and I had finished handling sound for the run of a stage musical in the same theater. We ran the whole thing using SawStudio to run the live mix while recording the shows. Not one tiny hiccup in any performance. No flaky switches and pots to worry about (except on the converters which were pretty much new).

The next show we were running was to be more complex, so at first we were considering using the "house console"... but after that concert night, we didn't even consider it.

I find I worry less about a SAW-based system than I did about the analog setups I used to use. I am betting that, after SAC goes through the early shakedown phase, it will amaze -- and convince -- a lot of people who SWORE they would never use a computer to handle a mix. I was pretty skeptical myself before I tried it out. Not too long before, I would have SWORN you would never get me to trust a live show to a computer setup.

Can it fail? Of course it can. No system is absolutely fail-proof (just ask NASA). I have had analog stuff fail. I am, among other things, a tech. I have done console repairs, so I know what's involved. Having a "spare" computer for a SAC setup would be cheap insurance, and all the parts can usually be found locally on short notice. Given the choice between repairing a console or building and installing a replacement computer between performances, I prefer the computer. As for the other gear... well, I see little difference in "failure risk" between the rack equipment for an analog setup and the converters and such for the digital setup.

The only thing that keeps me from buying into SAC right now is the current extreme tightness of my budget.

Funny thing is just how much computing power it takes to actually run a live show, compared to the computer power it took to sent the appollo missions to the moon.

NASA had to do it with less than what is in a hand held calculator.

At that time a 386 would of filled a city block.

Great and exciting age we live in.

[HapHazzard]

Howdy,

Now Steve, with his Innovason console (http://www.sawstudiouser.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6860), running XP hasn't lost a system yet but has lost power in the house. So he has a spare PC and one heck of a UPS holding up all the FOH racks and console. He's still out there, and recording 40 ch every show with SS-Full in the ether chain. Plus has a ether tap in the stream for the Aviom PEM system. He's very happy camper.

Now my requirements won't be as demanding as some of the churchs but the stress can be right up there some time. I will start with SAC running side by side with a splitter hocked to the house system.

For the monitors it will be a Thinkpad as a slave controller. Then later maybe a tablet or two. After that, 4-6 feeds to a simple PEM system using SAC maxtix. Finally, tablets for each member...."na". My luck they'd throw up on the tablet before the night is done.

Anyway with the matrix, a lot of possibilities are now open.
Hardware convidence? Well that's up to me. Pick the right stuff, mount / rack it correctly, get big UPS and tie everything down, then SAC will be less of a issue then the house systems I alway face.

My first setup with 24 channels
10/100 switch will do for me and if I have to get way out there, then I might go to a fiber ethernet. Little steps first.

Hap

http://home.earthlink.net/%7Ejvanhornrlh/Ethersound/SACethernet.jpg

[Warren]

Howdy,

Now Steve, with his Innovason console (http://www.sawstudiouser.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6860), running XP hasn't lost a system yet but has lost power in the house. So he has a spare PC and one heck of a UPS holding up all the FOH racks and console. He's still out there, and recording 40 ch every show with SS-Full in the ether chain. Plus has a ether tap in the stream for the Aviom PEM system. He's very happy camper.

Now my requirements won't be as demanding as some of the churchs but the stress can be right up there some time. I will start with SAC running side by side with a splitter hocked to the house system.

For the monitors it will be a Thinkpad as a slave controller. Then later maybe a tablet or two. After that, 4-6 feeds to a simple PEM system using SAC maxtix. Finally, tablets for each member...."na". My luck they'd throw up on the tablet before the night is done.

Anyway with the matrix, a lot of possibilities are now open.
Hardware convidence? Well that's up to me. Pick the right stuff, mount / rack it correctly, get big UPS and tie everything down, then SAC will be less of a issue then the house systems I alway face.

My first setup with 24 channels
10/100 switch will do for me and if I have to get way out there, then I might go to a fiber ethernet. Little steps first.

Hap

http://home.earthlink.net/%7Ejvanhornrlh/Ethersound/SACethernet.jpg


Add two more RME HDSP5296's and a bunch more ADA8000's and you could run three shows at the same time although you would have to monitor two of them via a RTS or Clearcomm system:D

[Perry]

This business is all about safety nets and thinking fast on your feet.
With analog, I have NEVER had an analog console or ANY analog gear fail me during a show. EVER. ............. If one module goes, you replace it with a spare on the spot, or have enough channels left to quick patch. Sure, accidents can happen. But if you maintain your gear, things should be good almost all of the time.

Valid points here for sure.

I don't recall ever having an ABSOLUTE failure during a show... one where the show actually stopped and there was no sound at all. But I sure remember some scary moments. Your comment about replacing a module reminds me of a show years ago at Billy Bob's in Texas with George Jones. I think I told this once earlier but here goes again:

The Jones Band opened, the bass player singing a few songs and then bringing Jones on. We were using the house system. Everything was fine at sound check. There was a 'booth' stage left for the monitor mix position and that's where I was. The booth is why we didn't set up our regular touring rig. It would have been a major ordeal to swap it out, if it was even possible.

As the show started, right away the main vocal mic cut out in the monitor console. Then it started erratically going on and off. The singer looked over at me in horror... I looked at the 'house' guy there in the booth with me in horror... and he looked like he'd like to be some place else. He said that he should have told me NOT to use that particular channel. He said to grab the screwdriver lying there and tap the module and usually that 'fixed' it! :eek:

I said something like.. Are you crazy???!!! I think I may have also threaten to kill him. :rolleyes:

Anticipating George walking out and using that mic at any moment I made a decision. The console was built into a sort of cabinet and the cabling wasn't easily accessible and there was NO time to waste. The thing was that you simply didn't want to set George off if at all possible. It just wasn't a good idea. ;)

Without turning off the power I used that screwdriver to quickly pull a spare module from further down the console and then copied setting from the malfunctioning one. Then with George literally walking onto the stage and the mic still cutting out in the monitors as the bass player introduced him, I yanked the bad strip and hot swapped in the other one and turned it on just as George waked up to the mic and said "How ya'll doing out there?"

What fun! :D

Anything can.. and sooner or later will.. break. I do believe that the digital setup can work though... you will just need to treat it as a true 'system' and have a dedicated rig set up properly and use the proper precautions.

As has been pointed out here, a lot of stuff now runs on a computer based system at it's heart. This isn't going to go away; it's going to become more and more in use whether we like it or not. I personally don't think there's any doubts of this.

As for other analog failures; I saw the WHO in Memphis with about half of the PA down. The show still went on but Roger Daltry apologized for the sound and I don't think it ever got fixed during the show.. not that I recall anyway.

I remember also seeing the Dooby Brothers in Vancouver where the PA actually shut down during a song... and boy, that was startling. It came back on and off a few times and then stayed on. I could image somebody kicking the cr*p out of something somewhere back stage. :)

You could do the same things with a computer setup really... have redundant systems and parts and still carry FAR less gear; which cuts down on weight, size, fuel, probably electrical energy.. and ultimately is more 'green' I'd think.

This is much the same of course as how digital recording has taken over that industry. Live sound may be a longer holdout but it's already coming.. the 'big' guys will want to hold onto their big expensive gear longer of course.. but people (like Frank for example) are already switching to digital based systems and I don't think it takes all that much of a stretch to see this becoming a 'build your own' scenario in the same way that recording has become.

Enter SAC.

I suppose if someone wants more 'safe' features for something like this, where you'd be more comfortable, you could look into things like redundant power supplies and RAID setups and certainly power conditioners and so on. Also keep spare parts.. or better yet a whole spare computer rig; still very cost effective compared to major analog components and with the other added benefits already mentioned.

I've seen Frank run the Kenny Rogers show and it's slick. And while it's a bit mind boggling at first to see plug-ins that are familiar to me from my recording rig being used in a large live show... you get over it pretty quick. ;) The benefits are hard to deny and doing away with racks of outboard gear and all that cabling sure is nice.

But.. you have to think when you see this.. it's really *just* a computer with a control surface. OK, it's more than that but... in some ways.. not really. Why couldn't you build something similar? The answer is.. you can.

Err.. enter... SAC. :)

Another product available that could be utilized for live sound is the Soundscape products. The Soundscape mixer is .. a mixer; standalone and with plug-in capability and with no latency. I still think this combo of Soundscape and SAWStudio is incredibly powerful. But, you can't do this with a laptop though.

Enter then.. SAC.

If I were doing live sound again I'd certainly be looking into utilizing the digital world to do it if I was allowed to... no question.

My ramblings... let the debate continue! :)

Perry

[HapHazzard]

Add two more RME HDSP5296's and a bunch more ADA8000's and you could run three shows at the same time although you would have to monitor two of them via a RTS or Clearcomm system:D
I could :). Just have to set down and map it out. Split the board into three console. I get 1-24 in 5 outs, the second 25-50 in and the next 5 outs and so on. Fiber network all the workstations and MADi fiber from all the stages and to the loudspeakers, send ques to the green rooms.....:confused:

HEY wait a minute! I thought I was trying to downsize so I can fit all in the back my Subaru Outback!:D

Hap

[Warren]

I could :). Just have to set down and map it out. Split the board into three console. I get 1-24 in 5 outs, the second 25-50 in and the next 5 outs and so on. Fiber network all the workstations and MADi fiber from all the stages and to the loudspeakers, send ques to the green rooms.....:confused:

HEY wait a minute! I thought I was trying to downsize so I can fit all in the back my Subaru Outback!:D

Hap

Big trucking outfit huh?:D

[IraSeigel]

Valid points here for sure.

I don't recall ever having an ABSOLUTE failure during a show... one where the show actually stopped and there was no sound at all. But I sure remember some scary moments. Your comment about replacing a module reminds me of a show years ago at Billy Bob's in Texas with George Jones. I think I told this once earlier but here goes again:

etc

Perry

Yes, modules go out, power can be flakey, etc. But one thing that can cause an absolute failure that I don't think has been mentioned here is if someone accidentally or deliberately slices your snake. Happened to me at Pine Knob. Lost 3/4 of our inputs just before an REO Speedwagon show. Do any of you carry a spare snake?

Probably a good idea to think about some spare Cat5. It's easier to carry than a spare snake trunk!

Ira

[Warren]

Yes, modules go out, power can be flakey, etc. But one thing that can cause an absolute failure that I don't think has been mentioned here is if someone accidentally or deliberately slices your snake. Happened to me at Pine Knob. Lost 3/4 of our inputs just before an REO Speedwagon show. Do any of you carry a spare snake?

Probably a good idea to think about some spare Cat5. It's easier to carry than a spare snake trunk!

Ira
And a heck of a lot cheaper

[Pedro Itriago]

Not to mention it can be rapidly fixed at the cutpoint

[sstillwell]

Yes, modules go out, power can be flakey, etc. But one thing that can cause an absolute failure that I don't think has been mentioned here is if someone accidentally or deliberately slices your snake. Happened to me at Pine Knob. Lost 3/4 of our inputs just before an REO Speedwagon show. Do any of you carry a spare snake?

Probably a good idea to think about some spare Cat5. It's easier to carry than a spare snake trunk!

Ira

Or use WiFi as a backup. With relatively inexpensive access points and directional antennae, you can get REALLY good distance out of it...and a super-strong reliable signal.

Scott

[IraSeigel]

Or use WiFi as a backup. With relatively inexpensive access points and directional antennae, you can get REALLY good distance out of it...and a super-strong reliable signal.

Scott

But you'd be getting into the same problem with whitespace and other wireless mics/IEMs that has been mentioned in other threads, wouldn't you? Or is WiFi an entirely different part of the spectrum?

And if it IS a completely different part of spectrum, then wouldn't WiFi be one solution to taking your laptop and mixing from any seat in the house?

Ira

[sstillwell]

Wi-Fi runs in the 2.4GHz and 5 GHz bands, whereas both VHF and UHF wireless spectrums are well below 1 GHz. VHF and UHF mics DO compete in the whitespace among TV channels that will be freed up in 2009. Wi-Fi is more likely to run into problems with leakage from microwave ovens or newer cordless telephones...both hopefully items that won't be present in large numbers in most concert events near the network.

Yes, I see it as a viable option. Just be aware that Wi-Fi can drop out with distances that would be no problem for a wired cable, and that you may have to use different antennae to get good signal at long range.

They can't cut the wireless signal with a knife or a chair leg, though. :)

Scott

[Bud Johnson]

When I record myself, I use my wifes laptop/wireless to control SS/daw which is one level down and on the other side of an 18" wall. The only problems I've ever had we're firewall related.
BTW, the laptop isn't fast enough to record even 2 tracks without glitches.

[lofi studios]

will i be able to designate the master computer? ie, allow the one conected to the snake to be atached to just a monitor computer and sac running on another?

so the snake is just leads to an edge of stage box, somebody checks the levels on a regular basis while running monitors and foh is other end of cat5 out yonder.

silly question iknow, but i have eard worse

Iain

[Warren]

will i be able to designate the master computer? ie, allow the one conected to the snake to be atached to just a monitor computer and sac running on another?

so the snake is just leads to an edge of stage box, somebody checks the levels on a regular basis while running monitors and foh is other end of cat5 out yonder.

silly question iknow, but i have eard worse

Iain

Forgive me but do you want to have the master (Host) out at mix position using a audio snake to the stage kinda like a normal config?
If so I can't see why not but it's not ideal you would not only have audio going back and forth to the stage from FOH you also would have cat5 un less you use wifi.

Do I understand you correctly?:confused:

[lofi studios]

mic on stage to ada8000 pre at edge of stage, into computer, ada8000 to power amps and onto speakers monitors etc.

that computer is then on a cat 5 out to foh.

i know what i want to say, just not good at saying it.

[Warren]

mic on stage to ada8000 pre at edge of stage, into computer, ada8000 to power amps and onto speakers monitors etc.

that computer is then on a cat 5 out to foh.

i know what i want to say, just not good at saying it.
From what Bob has stated thats how it can work.

[Bob L]

That is the idea... if you want to do it that way... you will hopefully be able to designate any networked computer to be the FOH mixer position... and any others to be either the monitor mixer position or an individual musician mixer position.

Bob L

[bcorkery]

And a heck of a lot cheaperdepends on the trunk :p

[IraSeigel]

Hap,
What program did you use to create your block diagram? Visio?

Ira

[studio-c]

Short for... ?

Perhaps your a Thomas Jefferson officianado? Maybe you can give me the "nickel" tour?

Gawd, I kill me.
Niiiice. If it was really big, it could be a Mondo-Cello.
You kill me too, Dave :D LOL

Cheers,
Scott

[Warren]

depends on the trunk :p

TONKA:D

[Mountain Media]

But you'd be getting into the same problem with whitespace and other wireless mics/IEMs that has been mentioned in other threads, wouldn't you? Or is WiFi an entirely different part of the spectrum?

And if it IS a completely different part of spectrum, then wouldn't WiFi be one solution to taking your laptop and mixing from any seat in the house?

Ira

Hi, Ira. I made the comment you mentioned in another thread, about caution with white-space allocation. Scott is correct in that current wifi devices operate in upper 2.5>GHz frequency bands. My comment was more toward the comment(s), I think made earlier in that thread or I saw somewhere, implying there may be more reliable wifi devices after the selloff of previously used analog TV freq. area is sorted out. If, indeed in the future, wifi devices start operation in some of this 'available' freq. area, then there may be a concern for these devices working in locations with many of the current wireless mic/IEM devices. This would, probably, not be as much of a concern within a home or business environment as it might be in performance venues. As we probably all know, and as far as I understand it, the wireless mic freqs are, in essence self-regulated within specific portions of these bands, and that 'could' become a problem with FCC sold portions of these same bands. Still to be sorted out.

[IraSeigel]

Hi, Ira. I made the comment you mentioned in another thread, about caution with white-space allocation. Scott is correct in that current wifi devices operate in upper 2.5>GHz frequency bands. My comment was more toward the comment(s), I think made earlier in that thread or I saw somewhere, implying there may be more reliable wifi devices after the selloff of previously used analog TV freq. area is sorted out. If, indeed in the future, wifi devices start operation in some of this 'available' freq. area, then there may be a concern for these devices working in locations with many of the current wireless mic/IEM devices. This would, probably, not be as much of a concern within a home or business environment as it might be in performance venues. As we probably all know, and as far as I understand it, the wireless mic freqs are, in essence self-regulated within specific portions of these bands, and that 'could' become a problem with FCC sold portions of these same bands. Still to be sorted out.

John,
Thanks for this additional info.
Yes, I agree that caution is in order with the selloff and reapportioning coming. As you know, there's a big scramble amongst the wireless mic/IEM manufacturers - Shure and Sennheiser to name the biggest - to make sure they have operating room (altho I believe Sennheiser finds themselves in a better position than most).

It's bad enough when a single mic or IEM experiences a momentary dropout on stage. Can't imagine what an entire show would sound like with a dropout.

I might try some wireless eq-ing prior to a show - when a failure or interference wouldn't be critical - but I think for my "Phase 1" I'll stick to the KISS principle. After all, I still haven't mastered SAW Live Mode yet!!

My Phase 1 will most likely be using one computer and my mic pre's/converters out at FOH along with a standard audio multicore snake. I'll get into an onstage computer and an FOH computer linked by a Cat5 "snake" in my "Phase 2".

Cheers,
Ira

[DaveS]

Bob -

Are the six monitor sends from each channel Stereo sends or mono?

Dave
Recordable Media Services

[Bob L]

First off all... no audio data is being sent across the network... so wireless dropout would not cause an audio glitch... only a momentary loss of control from a remote machine.

Each of the 24 monitor consoles plus the F)H has their own 6 stereo aux sends for fx... you will no longer be sending monitor mixes using auxes... you have an entire console for that.

Bob L

[IraSeigel]

First off all... no audio data is being sent across the network... so wireless dropout would not cause an audio glitch... only a momentary loss of control from a remote machine.Bob L

Yes, sorry. I should have realized.



Each of the 24 monitor consoles plus the F)H has their own 6 stereo aux sends for fx... you will no longer be sending monitor mixes using auxes... you have an entire console for that.
Bob L

I think he might have been asking in regards to stereo IEM mixes. On hardware consoles, e.g., 2 monitor mix knobs can be converted to 2 knobs that can do pan and level, going into 1 stereo mix. Or I might have mistaken his question.

Ira

[Bob L]

The auxes in SAC are the same model as SS.

Setup as stereo with level and pan... these days, most everything is stereo... in-ears are usually stereo... I am sticking with that.

Bob L

[Ian Alexander]

The auxes in SAC are the same model as SS.

Setup as stereo with level and pan... these days, most everything is stereo... in-ears are usually stereo... I am sticking with that.

Bob L
I think SAC is pretty forward looking in general. Monitor feeds should follow that theme. You'd better make those in-ear feeds at least 5.1.;)

[Warren]

I think SAC is pretty forward looking in general. Monitor feeds should follow that theme. You'd better make those in-ear feeds at least 5.1.;)

Forward thinking would be 10.1 no?:D

[DaveS]

The auxes in SAC are the same model as SS.

Setup as stereo with level and pan... these days, most everything is stereo... in-ears are usually stereo... I am sticking with that.

Bob L


Bob - that's great! I pretty much thought that it would be that way - I was just looking for confirmation.

Ira - you were correct in your IEM assumption.

Dave
Recordable Media Services

[DaveS]

Bob - I have another question - this isn't really teh right thread for it but it seems to be more active...

Regarding control surface control - will there be a Midi Learn function for the controls in SAC or are you going to set up a few templates for specific control surfaces?

I know that your coding in SS precluded doing that - and I suspect the same is true with SAC...???

Dave
Recordable Media Services

[Bob L]

Each control surface is so drastically different... most require active control of lights and fader feedback... and they all seem to have their own idea how it should work... in order to hook the surfaces into the complex functions within SS and SAC... and to use the TCP/IP remote hooks from a surface... it requires specific coding within the program, in my opinion.

Bob L

[AudioAstronomer]

Each control surface is so drastically different... most require active control of lights and fader feedback... and they all seem to have their own idea how it should work... in order to hook the surfaces into the complex functions within SS and SAC... and to use the TCP/IP remote hooks from a surface... it requires specific coding within the program, in my opinion.

Bob L

What about the large majority of controllers that simply require midi CC, and nothing else? Such as perhaps a basic midi keyboard controller that you could be using for snapshot control and use the corresponding knobs for.. whatever.

[Bob L]

Robert... the problem is that to use the readout displays... leds... LCDs... etc... each control surface requires special coding... they are all different...

I like to integrate things completely when I integrate them... to just hook a fader, that does not motorize to the proper starting point when the session is opened or when automation changes its setting is a complete waste of time, in my opinion...

To turn a knob or push a switch and not have an indicator LED light up properly, or not see what chan I am adjusting on the LCD display of the controller... no OK by me.

I had to write specific code routines to handle the touchbar in the new AlphaTrack... there was no way a simple learn command was goint to activate it into a useful function... each one of these things, so far, has required specific code.

I wish it were different.

Bob L

[AudioAstronomer]

Robert... the problem is that to use the readout displays... leds... LCDs... etc... each control surface requires special coding... they are all different...

I like to integrate things completely when I integrate them... to just hook a fader, that does not motorize to the proper starting point when the session is opened or when automation changes its setting is a complete waste of time, in my opinion...

To turn a knob or push a switch and not have an indicator LED light up properly, or not see what chan I am adjusting on the LCD display of the controller... no OK by me.

I had to write specific code routines to handle the touchbar in the new AlphaTrack... there was no way a simple learn command was goint to activate it into a useful function... each one of these things, so far, has required specific code.

I wish it were different.

Bob L

Bob, a very large majority of midi controllers do not have read-outs or LED's. keyboard controllers, drum pads, small fader boxes, synths etc... There are maybe 10 controllers out there that use this information (and most don't require it) and dozens upon dozens of midi devices that do not even have the capability, despite being very useful controllers.

Those things can be indispensable in a live situation, and far easier than directly controlling the laptop.

Just allowing user-assignable midi CC control would allow compatibility with just about every controller out there... which is mostly controllers with no need for LED or readout hooks. One time programming and you have opened doors for dozens of SAW and potentially SAC users to use the controllers they've been asking about for years.

In fact, I can't even see how this would be difficult to implement in any circumstance. A small midi hook that parses the data and sets the software's control. SAW already has a number of features (control track, automation, mix templates etc..) that allow a single feature to change a large number of software controls... Why not just stick a midi parser in front of it?

If anything.. it would take less time to implement than the amount of time you spend responding to forum posts and emails regarding controller capability, and it would probably mean a handful of sales to make your time worthwhile.

[IraSeigel]

... and it would probably mean a handful of sales to make your time worthwhile.

I wonder if each "MIDI Controller Add-on" would be something that people would purchase separately? I think so. If I knew I could buy a custom add-on for use with my Mackie UC, e.g., I'd pay. Perhaps ditto with the Behringer BCF, Tranzport, etc.?

(But let's leave him alone so he can finish SAC!)

Ira

[Naturally Digital]

Each control surface is so drastically different... most require active control of lights and fader feedback... and they all seem to have their own idea how it should work... in order to hook the surfaces into the complex functions within SS and SAC... and to use the TCP/IP remote hooks from a surface... it requires specific coding within the program, in my opinion.

Bob LDo you know yet whether SAC will use the same templates as SAW or does it require new ones?

On a related note, would you consider doing a midi template (sometime) for the M-Audio ProjectMix I/O? It's a decent controller (good value) and since their firewire drivers seem to be very good I wonder if this unit would lend itself to the SAW/SAC model... It might make for a nice combo on small (low channel count) gigs, corporate setups etc.

[Craig Allen]

Perhaps ditto with the Behringer BCF, Tranzport, etc.?
FYI - the Behringer BCF works great using the Mackie HUI emulation mode with SAW now.

[Bob L]

Robert... wish it would be so easy as you imply... so far... NOT... everytime I look at a new controiller it takes quite a bit of internal fiddling to hook it into workabilty.

But... most of these inexpensive controllers you mention also have their own built-in learn function... that is a more useful way to go... because now you can select your favorite control template in SS and then have the controller learn the midi that SS sends for any specific function... meanwhile... the functions are properly internally hooked in SS and the controller now gets to assign that function to one of its knobs or switches.

Bob L

[ttako]

Sorry if that was already answered before, but I am curious, if it is (will be) possible (and how) to run the main application SAC on two PCs at the same time in order to get a redundant system?
If yes, how would the Audio I/O hardwares handled? will that be an "online" type redundant system or a "changeover" type?
Will both systems be controlled paralell by all the TCP/IP controllers ?

Thanks,

Tamas Tako

[Bob L]

Well... I am sure there will many different approaches to using redundancy... at the incoming side, you can probably use one of the light-pipe splitters if you are using light-pipe converters... that would easily get the inputs into two separate systems at the same time... the outputs become a bit more challanging... some kind of a manually cable switching must be done, or the outs can be routed thru a switching box that could be handled with relays perhaps... or a physical mixer with mute groups to switch.

More ideas will probably surface as we go further into this new territory.

Bob L